Participatory multi-criteria assessment for monitoring actions and supporting decision making to combat desertification in the San Simon watershed (Arizona)

• Main Author: Ocampo-Melgar, Anahi
• Other Authors: Orr, Barron J.
• Language: en_US
• Published: The University of Arizona. 2013
• Subjects: Dryland restoration; Environmental assessment; Knowledge integration; Multi-criteria decision aiding; Participatory process; Arid Lands Resource Sciences; Decision making
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/10150/312523

Assessment of the myriad of historic attempts to manage and/or restore degraded drylands offers a rich opportunity to learn from the past, particularly if conducted with full stakeholder engagement. Participatory environmental assessment of past land management and restoration actions would contribute to the improvement of future management techniques in a way relevant to the concerns of people involved with or impacted by these actions. This can also help to deal with the often scant information available, conflicting values and perceptions among stakeholders, and the uncertainties inherent to complex dryland systems. In this study I applied and evaluated a participatory protocol that incorporated multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) tools to assess five actions in the San Simon watershed, one of the most extreme examples of degradation and human intervention in southeastern Arizona (U.S.). The participatory assessment process included a semi-structured interview, elicitation of local-based assessment criteria, prioritization of the assessment criteria, estimation of data, a MCDA-based integration and group evaluation of final results. The process was used to evaluate five combinations of grazing management, vegetation management and hydraulic structures implemented between the 1940s and 1980s. The application of this process allowed me to not only evaluate these actions in a participatory way, but also to identify and compare values and perceptions connected to the historic, cultural and scientific narratives used by three different categories of stakeholders (researchers, practitioners and land users). The revised Simos' procedure used to elicit assessment criteria weights proved useful to expose values and perceptions, source of the individual criteria priorities, while revealing conflictive points of views among the stakeholders. The outranking-facilitated participatory assessment, when compared to the unaided baseline assessment, proved useful in making stakeholder preferences explicit in the form of evaluation criteria and weights, while incorporating data and uncertainty. The specific MCDA outranking integration model used, ELECTRE IS, proved to be simple and systematically synthetic, helping stakeholders structure and re-evaluate their unaided assessments. The results of this study provide insights in how stakeholders' knowledge and views can be elicited, explored and effectively incorporated to assess and learn from past land management and restoration actions implemented in drylands.